|
or for the suppression of riots and tumults in the Province of Massachusetts Bay, in New England;" to which they desire the concurrence of the House;
And the said Bill was read the first time.
Ordered. That the Bill be read a second time on Wednesday next; and that the Lords be summoned.
Ordered, That the Bill be printed.
FRIDAY, May 13, 1774.
The order of the day being read, the Bill was accordingly read the second time, and committed to a Committee of the whole House.
Ordered, That the House be put into a Committee upon the said Bill on Monday next.
MONDAY, May 16, 1774.
The House, according to order, was adjourned during -pleasure, and put into a Committee upon the Bill.
After some time the House was resumed:
And Lord Boston reported from the Committee, that they had gone through the Bill, and directed him to report the same to the House, without any amendment.
Ordered, That the said Bill be read a third time, on Wednesday next; and that the Lords be summoned.
TUESDAY, May 17, 1774.
The Earl of Dartmouth (by his Majesty's command,) laid before the House more Papers relating to the disturbances at Boston, together with a list thereof; which was read by the Clerk, as follows:
No. 1. Copy of a Letter from Governor Hutchinson to the Earl of Dartmouth, dated Boston, 9th March, 1774; received 13th of May, enclosing,
No. 2. Extracts from the Boston Gazette.
No. 3. Copy of a Letter from Governor Hutchinson to the Earl of Dartmouth, dated Boston, 21st March, 1774, received 13th of May, enclosing.
No. 4. Copy of the Resolution of the House of Representatives, concurred in by the Council.
No. 5. Copy of a Message from the House of Representatives to Governor Hutchinson.
No. 6. Copy of Governor Hutchinson's Message to the House of Representatives.
And the titles thereof being read by the Clerk,
Ordered, That the said Papers do lie on the table.
WEDNESDAY, May 18, 1774.
The order of the day being read, the Bill was accordingly read the third time.
Upon reading the Petition of William, Bollan, Esq., Agent for the Council of his Majesty's Province of Massachusetts Bay, in New England, taking notice of a Bill depending in this House, intituled, "An Act for the Impartial Administration of Justice, in the cases of persons questioned for any acts done by them in the execution of the law, or for the suppression of riots and tumults in the Province of Massachusetts Bay, in New England;" and praying this right honorable House, "That the same may not "pass into a law; and that he may be heard by their Lord ships in support of his Petition,"
It is Ordered, That the said Petition do lie on the table.
Moved, That Mr. Bollan be called in, and heard at the Ear.
Which being objected to;
After debate,
The question was put thereupon? It was resolved in the Negative.
Then it was moved "That the Bill do Pass?"
Which being objected to;—
A debate ensued.
It was opened by the Earl of Buckinghampshire, who confessed this to be the most exceptionable of the American measures, but thought it was excused by necessity.
He was answered by Lord Shelburne, who spoke with great ability, spirit, and knowledge, of the subject.
The Lords Denbigh, Sandwich, and the Lord Chancellor, were the chief supporters of the Bill.
The Duke of Manchester spoke with that grace of manner and elegance of language which so peculiarly distinguish him.
The Marquis of Rockingham spoke late in the debate. His speech lasted near three quarters of an hour; and never was more attention given to a speaker on any occasion. He spoke with all the weight and authority of an able statesman, and all the feeling of a patriot, deeply concerned for the interest of his country. He entered fully into the civil policy which had originally given rise to the disturbances in America, and had in consequence produced bills and regulations so ill calculated to allay them. He took post upon the measure of his own administration, the repeal of the Stamp Act, on which he argued with great force. He insisted that that repeal was no more than a re-turn to the ancient policy of Great Britain, from which the tax had been a deviation. He then stated the new taxes laid on after his removal from office, as originating from no plan or policy whatsoever, but merely as the result of pique and passion; that they were in effect confessed to be so, because they were afterwards repealed for the greater part, as being laid by the avowal of Administration itself, in contradiction to all the principles of commerce.—That the Tea Duty, equally uncommercial and unproductive, was left as a pepper-corn, merely for the sake of contest with America, as the Ministry had likewise avowed. He censured very severely the doctrine of taxing for the sole purpose of exercising an invidious right, and insisted that taxes ought to be for the real purpose of supporting Government, and not purely to irritate and stir up dangerous questions. That the Stamp Act was a great object, and might have produced in time considerable revenues; but to risk the whole trade of England, and the affections of the Americans, in a quarrel with the Colonies for pepper-corns, he thought a very unwise proceeding. After this, he entered into the particulars of the Bill, and, among other things, in answer to the difficulties asserted to be laid on officers without such protection as was given by this Bill, he said that he thought the condition of men of honor and sensibility to be far worse under this Bill; for that no acquittal could be honorable, where the prosecutor had not the usual means of securing a fair trial. He concluded with a very emphatical recommendation of temper, as necessary in all things, but particularly in measures of this nature, and in subjects of so much delicacy: his own remarkable calmness and steadiness of mind, gave additional force to this part of his speech.
The Duke of Richmond spoke last in the debate, and with his usual spirit, pointed his answer chiefly to what fell from the Chancellor and Lord Sandwich: he concluded with recommending to the perusal of the House, a pamphlet, called "Considerations on the Measures carrying on against America," and the Bishop of St. Asaph's Sermon, preached 1773, before the Society for propagating the Gospel, as containing the soundest doctrines and the best policy.
After long debate,*
The question was put, "Whether this Bill shall Pass?"
It was resolved in the Affirmative: Contents, 43, Non-Contents, 12.
Dissentient.
1st. Because no evidence whatsoever has been laid before the House tending to prove that persons acting in support of public authority, and indicted for murder, cannot receive a fair trial within the Province; which is the object of this Bill. On the contrary, it has happened that an officer of the Army, charged with murder, has there received a fair and equitable trial, and been acquitted. This fact has happened even since the commencement of the present unhappy dissentions.
2dly. Because, after the proscription of the port of Boston, the disfranchisement of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay, and the variety of provisions which have been made in this session for new modelling the whole polity and judicature of that Province, this Bill is an humiliating confession of the weakness and inefficacy of all the proceedings of Parliament. By supposing that it may be impracticable by any means, that the public wisdom could de-
|